001Welcome to this evening's meetings. The district posted this evening's agenda to board docs at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of this meeting. Is there a motion to approve that previously posted agenda? So moved. Second. Are there any amendments to offer? There are no amendments. Thank you. The agenda has been moved and seconded. All those in favor, please say I. I. I. Those opposed, please signify by saying I oppose. Those abstaining, please signify by saying I abstain. Motion carried. The facilities report, Director Glenn. The facilities report is in the hands of each board member and has been made available to the public. I move for its adoption. Are there any comments from the board? Director War Savage. Yeah, I did have one clarifying question. To be clear, this resolution isn't to sunset Charles Kelly
002Elementary School at the end of this school year. It is to potentially sunset it for the end of next school year. Is that correct? That is correct. So that the sunsetting date would be the end of the 2025-2026 academic year, depending on the outcome of a vote of the vote we're about to take. Okay, thank you. Um Mr. Desnoyers, did we have a motion and second for this? Which should have preceded any comments or questions from the board. I second the motion. Yeah, I will now. We did. Are there any other comments from the board, Director Murphy Morsey? Thank you. I just wanted to say to all the staff and families, this came from with with careful consideration and we will continue to keep your comments and your thoughts and your advice under advisement. Thank
003you. Any other board member comments? There's a there's an electronic comment. Is there a risk? >> We have one online comment. Ms. Buford, would you like to read that? Comment is received from Joe Clark and Sadie Thomas, dated April 29th via email. The comment reads, "As we have voiced in the past, we are against the sunsetting of this without new facilities in place. Yes, now will not be until the following year. However, that doesn't change anything. Yes, we know you say enrollment at Stonehurst is down currently and the trailers are no longer used. We hear from other sources that those trailers are still used and crowding is still a concern. Safety is still a concern as well, despite Superintendent Bernhardt's statements that the area is safe. The activity in the area as well as 911
004dispatches in the area suggest otherwise. Bussing issues only continue to get worse and also likely will not change with this move. The only thing that changes is bigger class sizes for these kids who will now be going to school in a rougher neighborhood. Don't tell us Stonehurst was always our school because it wasn't. Our school was torn down years ago. For nearly 10 years, the district has promised us better facilities, new schools, etc. Yet has failed to provide any of these things for anyone east of Lansdowne Avenue. We're told money is an issue and other factors are part of the problem. Money doesn't stop you from asking for 12 million million for a new pool that benefits a couple dozen students. Yes, Dr. McGarry, I'm still pointing out the priority on a pool over schools.
005Money doesn't stop you from finding a way to potentially purchase DCMH to expand an already huge high school. Other factors didn't stop you from eventually expanding the precious Aronimink or building CHMS. Yes, we understand this is about money, what's best for the district and so on, but this should be what's right for the students in neighborhoods you're serving. The same students and neighborhoods the district has mistreated for so long. The same students and neighborhoods the district promised would see better. We're not seeing better, we're seeing repeated mistakes. We're told our students have it better because they have smaller class sizes, but really the smaller class sizes as well as the amazing staff are the only good things our students have in a district that has shown repeatedly they do not care about the students not
006living in the Drexel Hill or Secane zip codes. We have continuously heavily supported the district projects in hopes that these projects would show our kids some benefit before they've moved on. We will no longer do so until a new school, now seemingly a mythical location comparable to Asgard or Atlantis, is actual actually built for these students. Maybe the Charles Kelly parents can come together to push the district to send our kids to one of the nice schools like the Secane parents somehow managed to do as seems evident in the fact that you refuse to include those students in the redistricting. We have other obligations this evening and didn't see a point in wasting our time to figure out a way to be there in person for our voices to fall on obviously deaf ears, but
007do want our opinions on this matter heard and documented. End of comment and that is the final comment regarding this agenda item. Thank you, Ms. Buford. All those in favor, please say I. I. I. I. I. Those Those opposed, please say please say I oppose. Those abstaining, please say I abstain. Motion carries. We are now at the time for the public hearing. We will call on Upper Darby School District residents who signed in to address the board in the order in which they signed in, followed by emailed and phone comments. We would ask that you come forward, give your name and address, and present your comments in the 3-minute time limit. In accordance with policy 903, the time allotted for general comments, both in-person and submitted comments, will not exceed 1 hour. There are no
008in-person comments and I believe Ms. Buford, you said there are no uh submitted elec- uh submitted comments, general comments. Yes, sir, that's it. That's correct, thank you. Is there a motion for the adjournment of the meeting? So moved. Second. All those in favor? I. I. I. Meeting adjourned.